So, I've been talking to a lot of people about this lately, and there's a strong consensus that the Davite faith really needs to be fleshed out. Religion is an integral part of the theme, but it's just not clear sometimes what being a Davite means.
(Caveat: various ideas below may come from various people, so if I say something you talked to me about, I don't mean to plagiarize you. I just can't remember who said what anymore. So please say more about what you were thinking!)
I know a lot of people have tried to tackle this topic, but I thought perhaps an ongoing forum discussion would be the best way to go about it. If we get somewhere, with my free time this summer I could try to flesh out stuff that people liked into some more extensive helpfiles.
So, some thoughts to kick off discussion:
1) Afterlife: Right now, good folks go to be with the Lord of the Springs, bad folks are lost in darkness forever. How do we define good/bad -i.e., what gets you salvation? Is it purely works-based or at all based on salvation through faith? How does magery exactly fit into the picture - is eternal darkness only for mages, mages and heretics, or for all sinners?
2) Dogma: Viorick, who was briefly going to tackle this, had the idea that the Church has some central dogmas that are unquestioned (burn mages) some lesser dogmas where there is some minor debate (can you burn a mage after death to purify them?), and some even lesser dogmas that totally vary from place to place and aren't even really heresy to disagree with (. I loved this as an organizational structure - do other people agree? What should the 'tiers' be called?
3) Cruelty: Davism's biggest problem, I think, is that it seems cruel to modern players. The logic behind burning isn't well laid-out as something to save a mage from eternal damnation. I think we need to emphasize this more. Of course, there are likely differences between duchies (going back to the Dogma point), but being a devout Davite needs to be something that is entirely compatible with a reasonable moral code.
4) Catholicism: Davism's SECOND biggest problem is that it looks like fantasy Catholicism. How can we shake this up? New vestments? Different approaches to sexuality? Daily practices other than confession? Davism has no Jesus, it has Dav instead - what does that imply? I would personally like priestly marriage as a big differentiator but I believe this has been stated previously as being off the table.
I'd love to hear any other thoughts anyone has too, not just stuff on this list!
Davism - Defining it
No, I do agree that it shouldn't be one size fits all without variation - that's why I liked the idea of the three 'steps' of dogma, to make it clear that there's some room for practice to vary between regions.
But what can vary and what's fundamental? With heresy being such a big deal, I feel like we need to know what's within acceptable parameters.
But what can vary and what's fundamental? With heresy being such a big deal, I feel like we need to know what's within acceptable parameters.
Well, I think the core elements would be:
-Belief that magic and all its works are inherently evil, and a commitment to destroy magic wherever it is found.
-Adherence to the teachings of Dav (ie laws of charity, giving etc)
-Support of the Holy Order of Dav as successors to and guardians of his legacy.
Or something like that?
Frankly though, I like the idea of people having to tip-toe on things like the afterlife, risking heresy charges if their beliefs conflict with the current leadership of the Order. A heresy charge doesn't mean you get burned unless it's pretty severe, and there's a lot of interesting RP to have with the lesser degrees of heresy.
-Belief that magic and all its works are inherently evil, and a commitment to destroy magic wherever it is found.
-Adherence to the teachings of Dav (ie laws of charity, giving etc)
-Support of the Holy Order of Dav as successors to and guardians of his legacy.
Or something like that?
Frankly though, I like the idea of people having to tip-toe on things like the afterlife, risking heresy charges if their beliefs conflict with the current leadership of the Order. A heresy charge doesn't mean you get burned unless it's pretty severe, and there's a lot of interesting RP to have with the lesser degrees of heresy.
Cardinal Kibane ab Kagson and his player are going to be starting to push for these sorts of clarifications IC and OOC, assuming staff support. I'll be posting a series of considerably more specific posts on the Order board for us all to consider and respond to. It's probably easier to have it all in its own place rather than getting lost on the general board. Also I posted them before seeing this.
I got asked to throw my two cents in, so will do so here (been writing this in installments so it's choppy, but may as well spit it all out before I go to the Order board). Anyway, take it or leave it!
I've always rather liked Wolf's posts on Charalin culture - he fleshes things out, but you can pretty much play any kind of Charalin you want while still using them as a base to pull from or ignore. A series of forum posts on Davism, to give people ideas to pull from, but without making them necessarily canon re:help files may be just as useful. I’m skittish of anything more solid than that, especially re: wiggle room. There should be wiggle room, but if you’re breaking it into official ‘tiers’ (when the religion already has tiers) and then people are just going to say it’s okay to disagree and that’s that. It also makes it seem a LOT like venial and non-venial sin, when we’re trying to be less Catholic.
Re: Catholicism – I guess I don’t personally see this as a problem. I’m from a Catholic family myself and never felt offended by it to be honest, but this comes up a lot. Realistically, I think you either need to work within the Church framework or really change a lot of things to get it away from that structure. Even changing vestments or sexuality requirements re: priests doesn’t take it away from most Christian church organizations.
Really, it’s the structure that’s similar, and not the religion itself. Dav is not Jesus. The Lord of the Springs was assumedly a peaceful water-based religion prior to Dav bringing in the bigotry and using the religion as a means of control of the populace. Dav is a sword through the darkness, not a savior, and he doesn’t preach peace.
I think some significant restructuring and change in vocabulary would need to be done to the Holy Order in order for it to get away from it – starting with the cathedral not being called a cathedral (temple? Citadel?) and the rename of ranks (particularly bishops, cardinal, etc).
But I’m not sure that’s absolutely 100% necessary. I think a lot of this can be handled through RP, if people just want to RP in a different way.
More emphasis on religious holidays can help – we didn’t do a really great job of that when I was GL and it’s something that, if explored, could really help. It’s difficult sometimes when it depends on the IG time, which isn’t always convenient for play. I think there’s a possibility of more quests or events of that sort of nature to highlight these holidays – a lot of work went into their origins and creation stories and it brings a lot of the non-Christian flavor to the religion. There’s a lot that can be done with the Springs as well.
There were some threads a while back with suggestions on powers for priests - particularly in blessings and protections they could lay down on the faithful. That’d be something. I’ve seen priests do a lot of faith healings and other things through the cleansing of water, which could help restore people as well. Most of this is possible through RP alone, but it’d be nice for there to be code benefits (I mean, after all, we can kill rats with rhyme – that’s totally religious magic.) We would never CALL it magic, but simply a blessing or the favor of the Lord of the Springs or whatever. Same thing here. Totally in-theme.
Re: Cruelty and Burnings:
It's not just about saving mages. I tried to emphasize this on Zin when we had the great burning of all the magical items from the keep. Mages aren't just tainted people being burned, they are rabid monsters. They kill people and turn them into bags. They eat babies and kill thousands in floods, then loose demons upon the survivors. If a rabid dog were attacking your child, you'd kill it. The same practicality should be taken to mages. We have to kill them to survive and protect our loved ones; that we do it through burning so their souls might be saved is frankly a kindness and act of mercy.
After this last quest, I would think most people would have no problem with killing mages. 3/4 of the city is dead because of a tainted soul gone mad (aka, some crack pot mages). Perhaps more help files or books on bad/rabid mages and/or curse words associated with them would help this. We have far too many players that are disgusted by the Order’s views re: Mages and while I understand modern sensibilities, this isn’t the Salem witch trials. There /is/ magic and people with it are doing some legitimately horrible things.
My view re: afterlife. Salvation has to do with taint. There's a tiered sinning system and process re:confessions to remove yourself of taint. If you are tainted, you are cast into the darkness. If you aren't, you have the mercy of the light of the Lord of the Springs. Some things give you automatic taint that suppresses your whole soul/body, i.e. magery. Some taint you take on through your own immoral actions. Who knows how much taint is enough to cast you in the darkness? Best just to play it safe and not worry about it by having none at all.
I think the wiggle room here is exactly how much ‘sinful’ taint gets you cast into the abyss of the absence of the Lord of the Springs. Also, the vision of the afterlife could change from duchy to duchy, while still being centered around being in the grace of the Lord of the Springs vs. bereft of it.
Going from the POV of a water-based religion, cleansing through fire seems like it doesn’t fit – water and fire are polar opposites. However, an inborn taint can’t be cleansed or washed away by water. The only thing that can purify it completely, to eradicate it completely, is to turn it to ash. Most of us can cleanse ourselves through the water, but if it’s the taint is too high and the water can never make it clean, then we use fire.
Dogma: I'd have loved to see more theological debate within Church characters that isn't SHOULD we burn or torture, but the lesser ones you mentioned (can you burn them after and they are purified?) etc. I think there is some room within the tier of sins that we already have for different duchies to have different beliefs - I'm sure in the more 'sexytime' duchies, the sins of the flesh are considered lesser sins than they are in Lithmore.. All of this is free for people to RP – and they have, as I’ve had people complain about penances for such and such when back home their priests wouldn’t think it’s a big deal.
I've always rather liked Wolf's posts on Charalin culture - he fleshes things out, but you can pretty much play any kind of Charalin you want while still using them as a base to pull from or ignore. A series of forum posts on Davism, to give people ideas to pull from, but without making them necessarily canon re:help files may be just as useful. I’m skittish of anything more solid than that, especially re: wiggle room. There should be wiggle room, but if you’re breaking it into official ‘tiers’ (when the religion already has tiers) and then people are just going to say it’s okay to disagree and that’s that. It also makes it seem a LOT like venial and non-venial sin, when we’re trying to be less Catholic.
Re: Catholicism – I guess I don’t personally see this as a problem. I’m from a Catholic family myself and never felt offended by it to be honest, but this comes up a lot. Realistically, I think you either need to work within the Church framework or really change a lot of things to get it away from that structure. Even changing vestments or sexuality requirements re: priests doesn’t take it away from most Christian church organizations.
Really, it’s the structure that’s similar, and not the religion itself. Dav is not Jesus. The Lord of the Springs was assumedly a peaceful water-based religion prior to Dav bringing in the bigotry and using the religion as a means of control of the populace. Dav is a sword through the darkness, not a savior, and he doesn’t preach peace.
I think some significant restructuring and change in vocabulary would need to be done to the Holy Order in order for it to get away from it – starting with the cathedral not being called a cathedral (temple? Citadel?) and the rename of ranks (particularly bishops, cardinal, etc).
But I’m not sure that’s absolutely 100% necessary. I think a lot of this can be handled through RP, if people just want to RP in a different way.
More emphasis on religious holidays can help – we didn’t do a really great job of that when I was GL and it’s something that, if explored, could really help. It’s difficult sometimes when it depends on the IG time, which isn’t always convenient for play. I think there’s a possibility of more quests or events of that sort of nature to highlight these holidays – a lot of work went into their origins and creation stories and it brings a lot of the non-Christian flavor to the religion. There’s a lot that can be done with the Springs as well.
There were some threads a while back with suggestions on powers for priests - particularly in blessings and protections they could lay down on the faithful. That’d be something. I’ve seen priests do a lot of faith healings and other things through the cleansing of water, which could help restore people as well. Most of this is possible through RP alone, but it’d be nice for there to be code benefits (I mean, after all, we can kill rats with rhyme – that’s totally religious magic.) We would never CALL it magic, but simply a blessing or the favor of the Lord of the Springs or whatever. Same thing here. Totally in-theme.
Re: Cruelty and Burnings:
It's not just about saving mages. I tried to emphasize this on Zin when we had the great burning of all the magical items from the keep. Mages aren't just tainted people being burned, they are rabid monsters. They kill people and turn them into bags. They eat babies and kill thousands in floods, then loose demons upon the survivors. If a rabid dog were attacking your child, you'd kill it. The same practicality should be taken to mages. We have to kill them to survive and protect our loved ones; that we do it through burning so their souls might be saved is frankly a kindness and act of mercy.
After this last quest, I would think most people would have no problem with killing mages. 3/4 of the city is dead because of a tainted soul gone mad (aka, some crack pot mages). Perhaps more help files or books on bad/rabid mages and/or curse words associated with them would help this. We have far too many players that are disgusted by the Order’s views re: Mages and while I understand modern sensibilities, this isn’t the Salem witch trials. There /is/ magic and people with it are doing some legitimately horrible things.
My view re: afterlife. Salvation has to do with taint. There's a tiered sinning system and process re:confessions to remove yourself of taint. If you are tainted, you are cast into the darkness. If you aren't, you have the mercy of the light of the Lord of the Springs. Some things give you automatic taint that suppresses your whole soul/body, i.e. magery. Some taint you take on through your own immoral actions. Who knows how much taint is enough to cast you in the darkness? Best just to play it safe and not worry about it by having none at all.
I think the wiggle room here is exactly how much ‘sinful’ taint gets you cast into the abyss of the absence of the Lord of the Springs. Also, the vision of the afterlife could change from duchy to duchy, while still being centered around being in the grace of the Lord of the Springs vs. bereft of it.
Going from the POV of a water-based religion, cleansing through fire seems like it doesn’t fit – water and fire are polar opposites. However, an inborn taint can’t be cleansed or washed away by water. The only thing that can purify it completely, to eradicate it completely, is to turn it to ash. Most of us can cleanse ourselves through the water, but if it’s the taint is too high and the water can never make it clean, then we use fire.
Dogma: I'd have loved to see more theological debate within Church characters that isn't SHOULD we burn or torture, but the lesser ones you mentioned (can you burn them after and they are purified?) etc. I think there is some room within the tier of sins that we already have for different duchies to have different beliefs - I'm sure in the more 'sexytime' duchies, the sins of the flesh are considered lesser sins than they are in Lithmore.. All of this is free for people to RP – and they have, as I’ve had people complain about penances for such and such when back home their priests wouldn’t think it’s a big deal.
I loved Wimple's post, but probably sit on the side of "more definition than we have now could be happy". This being said, I don't want to go the whole "proscribed down to rigid uniformity in all aspects" detail either. I just think we can use more than we have. What follows is my opinion, and it is ONLY an opinion, nothing more.
I personally want to move away from Catholicism. I know some Catholics aren't offended, some have been. It's probably a personal preference more than a requirement, but I'd like to. I'm not comfortable RPing Catholicism or a real life religion OOCly. I'm probably not a good Christian, but I'm not okay with making light of real beliefs, especially ones I personally hold dear.
This said, I do think that the structure and some aspects of 'Catholic' religion are valid. Afterall, we're looking at 'medieval society' as a theme. Fantasy medieval, but medieval none-the-less. Religion was a huge aspect of medieval culture, and thus it's appropriate for our religion to have similarities because it's filling in that role.
AFTERLIFE
I like the view of the afterlife as either 'with the Lord of the Springs' or 'lost and in pain/darkness/exile for eternity'. I do not like the "Christian" concept of hell (using generalities) with fire, brimestone, and an adversary/Satan, for TI.
In fact, I've outlined the afterlife aspect of the TIverse's "reality" to a degree that there is a canon system behind magic that explores the hard physics of this, and therefore extreme deviation from it may invalidate some code, theme, and actual world physics. This said, the 'hard truth' that I've stuck to in game design has never been openly released to the pbase with the exact point of aiming to encourage people to create philosophy and arguments in-game based on their observations of the system. Thus, provided that we philosophize around the concept at this level and stick to 'what if <this effect> was because of <that>?' and having people believe it, it should be just fine to have whatever take on it a person wants to.
DOGMA
A similar vein was set on the Lord of the Springs, what he is, etc. There's a broadly accepted history with "known" (albeit mythical/legendary in tone and nature) aspects that people share amongst one another. It is known that:
- Dav was a form of a messiah, saving the 5 Duchies from condemnation by bringing them back to the Lord of the Springs
- Dav hated magic because it was the personification of evil. The very act of magic taints the soul, taint drives a soul mad and prevents it from connecting with the Lord of the Springs.
- The taint has some sort of physical or metaphysical aspect that is destroyed by fire.
- The Holy Order is the hand of the Lord of the Springs and takes its guidance from the Lord of the Springs.
- The whole general gambit of sins exists. Sins taint the soul, just like magery does. Magery is a sin, like lying. However, it's generally accepted that few sins are as grave, and there's a ladder and priority of sins. It'd be hard to equal magery.
- Penance is the method to remove lesser taint, and penances are set by the Holy Order, generally upon confession.
- The religion has a lot of superstitions, some of which may or may not be true, but do happen (like candles burning blue).
CRUELTY AND BURNINGS
I agree this is the hardest thing for a modern player to swallow, and I think it makes the church have few friends, even though it's ICly appropriate. I think it is explained in large part as 'doing the best we can to protect ourselves from evil as well as save souls', but one thing that's missing is perhaps the understanding that this world is crueller and harsher than ours is. It's not just the church that is corrupt and doing cruel stuff - the Reeves are a justice into themselves, able to declare a person guilty of a crime even if the crime wasn't a crime a moment ago. People generally wear weaponry and know how to use it. Might makes right in this world. If someone kills someone and leaves them lying in the streets for dead, the chances of people figuring out whodunnit are slip. We don't have fingerprinting or security cameras. This world is damned dangerous, and everyone is corrupt. The nobles? They think they're better versions of the average joe, and worse everyone believes The Lord of the Springs made it that way. These are the facts of medieval life, and TI's theme in particular. The issue? The church has a game stake/role in actually fulfilling these biases whereas others don't, so they practice it more and are shunned more. But hey, they're some of the best antagonists in the game, and when we're not personally suffering their attentions, let's all admit it - we love that they exist and inject a bit of 'fear' into the game.
MYTHS
- The creation myth is, in my mind, a big missing thing. I've seen a few stabs at it, and have even attempted to do so myself. I've seen some good ones, but often felt they didn't uphold the dogma or were just a story. In general, I think people look to religion to learn something or find guidance or support. I'd like to see a creation story that fits with the dogma, might explain some of it, etc.
- Stories that talk about the aspect of the Lord of the Springs are missing. Most religions express a view of what their god/s look like - are they human? Powerful like the sun or stars? Similar to nature like animals or half-animals/half humans? (I like the last a bit for TI because it links in feature to TI's demons).
PERSONAL LIKES AND DISLIKES
- I don't like The Lord of the Springs being called 'God' ICly. Again, it comes back to my personal feelings OOCly about taking God's name in vain and whatnot. I just don't think it's necessary to have TI's populace talk about their god in such a manner when it can be confronting OOCly to people who actually feel they know who God is, and it's not a fictional game persona (and wow, I probably sound a lot more religious than I feel or even act OOCly, but that gets to me, so I assume it'd get to other people).
- I like the use of very emotive titles like Cardinal, Archbishop, and Bishop probably simply because I'm used to them on TI and my IRL religion doesn't use those terms. This said, I'm not keen on adding more Catholic titles when others like 'priestess' will do instead of 'nun'.
- I like the idea of really making Davism shine as its own religion. I like the idea of military-style vestments including some forms of armor (I used to love the leather cloaks they'd wear) and really different dogma/beliefs/culture to irl Christiantity.
- I don't like priests marrying and won't support a change to this because I think it makes them different to play to other roles in a fun way. I enjoy having characters with hopeless romance, and there's not really a lot of orders/reasons that I could see people not marrying in - I'd like to see it in game somewhere. It landed in the Order's lap, so I'll run with it. It's just a part of the theme of the game. That's an oath these characters take to join the Order.
- I advocate different approaches to sexuality. Historically the default has been that they are not open to homosexuality, but I think that might be bred of the 'what would Christianity do, and not having this filled in'. As I don't think this is fair to homosexual players in much the same way that making females of lesser equality is unfair to female players, I'm totally for Davism to be accepting of homosexuality. It's just not okay to force these players to be persecuted in a RPG when they want to RP natural things like love and affection and express/enjoy their natural preferences in this area.
- I also advocate a shift in flavor to focus on things that could be fleshed out. I'd like to see a highlight of things like the sign of the chalice and daily practices. I'd love to see attitudes based on Dav's attitudes. I love the idea of the game being a bit more cruel and hardcore - we're pushing for that to a degree in the Southside and in trying to puff up Reeves a bit with backing their authority to be 'judge/jury/executioner' on the law. I'd like to see us recapture some of the danger, and thus exhilaration, of playing TI.
- I'd also like to see more investigating. Not "oh, we found out he was a mage, and POW, kill," but more watching people, building a case for them. Profiling them, etc. And genuinely keeping it IC. Right now, it feels a bit black and white to me - either there's no evidence a person is a mage, or there's evidence, and people assume that person IS A MAGE. What happened to 'that remark was a bit off-color? A holy man wouldn't say that... I should keep it in mind'... 'she did that? maybe she's a heretic...' 'Well, that's a sin. Did she atone for it? I wonder how many sins she has that she hasn't atoned for? Too many is a sign of taint, and we might have a mage..." stuff like that. The fact is people don't know when they're seeing a mage or what the signs of magery really are. I wouldn't even trust an informant that said someone was a mage - the informant could be using me to try to burn a rival. Even if they weren't, unless they saw magic with their very own eyes, how would they know that they're observing a mage? If they did know, and really knew, then either they should be an Inquisitor or they're a mage themselves. Magic taints, right? So the Order should try to keep magic out of the common man's hands and 'contained' within itself, even just knowledge of it...
STUFF MISSED
- I don't see Davism as a water based religion. Mages were powerful entities before Davism, and magic on TI has (at this time) a very elemental flavor to it. So does medicine (phlegm, yellow bile, black bile, etc). I think it's actually more of an 'elemental' religion where water was revered for its ability to soothe and bring calmness. Fire to purify. We haven't explored air and earth so much (but if you note, there's a room east of the fountis that's a compass that I designed to revere air...) Anyway, yeah, that stuff is there, but perhaps under-noticed?
Thanks for listening/reading my ramble. Also, please note - It's all just an opinion, no more valid than anyone else's!
I personally want to move away from Catholicism. I know some Catholics aren't offended, some have been. It's probably a personal preference more than a requirement, but I'd like to. I'm not comfortable RPing Catholicism or a real life religion OOCly. I'm probably not a good Christian, but I'm not okay with making light of real beliefs, especially ones I personally hold dear.
This said, I do think that the structure and some aspects of 'Catholic' religion are valid. Afterall, we're looking at 'medieval society' as a theme. Fantasy medieval, but medieval none-the-less. Religion was a huge aspect of medieval culture, and thus it's appropriate for our religion to have similarities because it's filling in that role.
AFTERLIFE
I like the view of the afterlife as either 'with the Lord of the Springs' or 'lost and in pain/darkness/exile for eternity'. I do not like the "Christian" concept of hell (using generalities) with fire, brimestone, and an adversary/Satan, for TI.
In fact, I've outlined the afterlife aspect of the TIverse's "reality" to a degree that there is a canon system behind magic that explores the hard physics of this, and therefore extreme deviation from it may invalidate some code, theme, and actual world physics. This said, the 'hard truth' that I've stuck to in game design has never been openly released to the pbase with the exact point of aiming to encourage people to create philosophy and arguments in-game based on their observations of the system. Thus, provided that we philosophize around the concept at this level and stick to 'what if <this effect> was because of <that>?' and having people believe it, it should be just fine to have whatever take on it a person wants to.
DOGMA
A similar vein was set on the Lord of the Springs, what he is, etc. There's a broadly accepted history with "known" (albeit mythical/legendary in tone and nature) aspects that people share amongst one another. It is known that:
- Dav was a form of a messiah, saving the 5 Duchies from condemnation by bringing them back to the Lord of the Springs
- Dav hated magic because it was the personification of evil. The very act of magic taints the soul, taint drives a soul mad and prevents it from connecting with the Lord of the Springs.
- The taint has some sort of physical or metaphysical aspect that is destroyed by fire.
- The Holy Order is the hand of the Lord of the Springs and takes its guidance from the Lord of the Springs.
- The whole general gambit of sins exists. Sins taint the soul, just like magery does. Magery is a sin, like lying. However, it's generally accepted that few sins are as grave, and there's a ladder and priority of sins. It'd be hard to equal magery.
- Penance is the method to remove lesser taint, and penances are set by the Holy Order, generally upon confession.
- The religion has a lot of superstitions, some of which may or may not be true, but do happen (like candles burning blue).
CRUELTY AND BURNINGS
I agree this is the hardest thing for a modern player to swallow, and I think it makes the church have few friends, even though it's ICly appropriate. I think it is explained in large part as 'doing the best we can to protect ourselves from evil as well as save souls', but one thing that's missing is perhaps the understanding that this world is crueller and harsher than ours is. It's not just the church that is corrupt and doing cruel stuff - the Reeves are a justice into themselves, able to declare a person guilty of a crime even if the crime wasn't a crime a moment ago. People generally wear weaponry and know how to use it. Might makes right in this world. If someone kills someone and leaves them lying in the streets for dead, the chances of people figuring out whodunnit are slip. We don't have fingerprinting or security cameras. This world is damned dangerous, and everyone is corrupt. The nobles? They think they're better versions of the average joe, and worse everyone believes The Lord of the Springs made it that way. These are the facts of medieval life, and TI's theme in particular. The issue? The church has a game stake/role in actually fulfilling these biases whereas others don't, so they practice it more and are shunned more. But hey, they're some of the best antagonists in the game, and when we're not personally suffering their attentions, let's all admit it - we love that they exist and inject a bit of 'fear' into the game.
MYTHS
- The creation myth is, in my mind, a big missing thing. I've seen a few stabs at it, and have even attempted to do so myself. I've seen some good ones, but often felt they didn't uphold the dogma or were just a story. In general, I think people look to religion to learn something or find guidance or support. I'd like to see a creation story that fits with the dogma, might explain some of it, etc.
- Stories that talk about the aspect of the Lord of the Springs are missing. Most religions express a view of what their god/s look like - are they human? Powerful like the sun or stars? Similar to nature like animals or half-animals/half humans? (I like the last a bit for TI because it links in feature to TI's demons).
PERSONAL LIKES AND DISLIKES
- I don't like The Lord of the Springs being called 'God' ICly. Again, it comes back to my personal feelings OOCly about taking God's name in vain and whatnot. I just don't think it's necessary to have TI's populace talk about their god in such a manner when it can be confronting OOCly to people who actually feel they know who God is, and it's not a fictional game persona (and wow, I probably sound a lot more religious than I feel or even act OOCly, but that gets to me, so I assume it'd get to other people).
- I like the use of very emotive titles like Cardinal, Archbishop, and Bishop probably simply because I'm used to them on TI and my IRL religion doesn't use those terms. This said, I'm not keen on adding more Catholic titles when others like 'priestess' will do instead of 'nun'.
- I like the idea of really making Davism shine as its own religion. I like the idea of military-style vestments including some forms of armor (I used to love the leather cloaks they'd wear) and really different dogma/beliefs/culture to irl Christiantity.
- I don't like priests marrying and won't support a change to this because I think it makes them different to play to other roles in a fun way. I enjoy having characters with hopeless romance, and there's not really a lot of orders/reasons that I could see people not marrying in - I'd like to see it in game somewhere. It landed in the Order's lap, so I'll run with it. It's just a part of the theme of the game. That's an oath these characters take to join the Order.
- I advocate different approaches to sexuality. Historically the default has been that they are not open to homosexuality, but I think that might be bred of the 'what would Christianity do, and not having this filled in'. As I don't think this is fair to homosexual players in much the same way that making females of lesser equality is unfair to female players, I'm totally for Davism to be accepting of homosexuality. It's just not okay to force these players to be persecuted in a RPG when they want to RP natural things like love and affection and express/enjoy their natural preferences in this area.
- I also advocate a shift in flavor to focus on things that could be fleshed out. I'd like to see a highlight of things like the sign of the chalice and daily practices. I'd love to see attitudes based on Dav's attitudes. I love the idea of the game being a bit more cruel and hardcore - we're pushing for that to a degree in the Southside and in trying to puff up Reeves a bit with backing their authority to be 'judge/jury/executioner' on the law. I'd like to see us recapture some of the danger, and thus exhilaration, of playing TI.
- I'd also like to see more investigating. Not "oh, we found out he was a mage, and POW, kill," but more watching people, building a case for them. Profiling them, etc. And genuinely keeping it IC. Right now, it feels a bit black and white to me - either there's no evidence a person is a mage, or there's evidence, and people assume that person IS A MAGE. What happened to 'that remark was a bit off-color? A holy man wouldn't say that... I should keep it in mind'... 'she did that? maybe she's a heretic...' 'Well, that's a sin. Did she atone for it? I wonder how many sins she has that she hasn't atoned for? Too many is a sign of taint, and we might have a mage..." stuff like that. The fact is people don't know when they're seeing a mage or what the signs of magery really are. I wouldn't even trust an informant that said someone was a mage - the informant could be using me to try to burn a rival. Even if they weren't, unless they saw magic with their very own eyes, how would they know that they're observing a mage? If they did know, and really knew, then either they should be an Inquisitor or they're a mage themselves. Magic taints, right? So the Order should try to keep magic out of the common man's hands and 'contained' within itself, even just knowledge of it...
STUFF MISSED
- I don't see Davism as a water based religion. Mages were powerful entities before Davism, and magic on TI has (at this time) a very elemental flavor to it. So does medicine (phlegm, yellow bile, black bile, etc). I think it's actually more of an 'elemental' religion where water was revered for its ability to soothe and bring calmness. Fire to purify. We haven't explored air and earth so much (but if you note, there's a room east of the fountis that's a compass that I designed to revere air...) Anyway, yeah, that stuff is there, but perhaps under-noticed?
Thanks for listening/reading my ramble. Also, please note - It's all just an opinion, no more valid than anyone else's!
I agree with a lot of the points made in this post and others, and the points I don't necessarily agree with have made me think a lot... that said, I'm going to weigh in on a single issue because I haven't the time or brainpower for more.
The minor thing: Homosexuality.
I think it's an interesting notion that we might articulate a different stance to homosexuality as a means of distancing Davism from Catholicism. However, as a homosexual player and a historian of homosexuality, I do feel compelled to highlight the fact that animosity toward homosexuality (if not outright intolerance) is very much so a cross-cultural phenomenon. It's not universal, perhaps, but there's a lot of evidence that even in cultures where it is believed homosexuality was historically 'accepted', it was typically a heavily regulated, slandered, and distrusted practice. I.e., even Greek pederasty was criticized contemporaneously for its sexual elements; the Romans emphasized the power dynamics of homosexual sex; and I could go on, ad nauseam.
There's actually some interesting scholarship concerning homosexuality and its treatment globally (historically) that suggests that societies tended to adopt one of a few ways of handling the big problem of homosexuality, which was mostly the male power dynamic, by either
I'm personally in favor of making it an accepted (i.e., no burnings) but perhaps distrusted and derided practice (closer to the opinions of antiquity, i.e. Greeks and Romans). Note, what follows is purely personal opinion, but:
Again, as a player who personally identifies as homosexual, oppression and prejudice have been part and parcel of my life in many ways. In some ways, I appreciate being able to explore what that means in a (safe) fantasy setting. Making homosexuality != outright burning provides enough cultural space to explore those narratives (of oppression, and of resistance and agency) without removing the dynamic of taboo entirely, which is something that I think really is integral to the queer experience (it's a part of the language we use to define ourselves, like the word 'queer' itself).
Obviously, different people will have different thoughts, but hopefully you guys will be comfortable considering my point both on historical and personal/philosophical grounds.
The minor thing: Homosexuality.
I think it's an interesting notion that we might articulate a different stance to homosexuality as a means of distancing Davism from Catholicism. However, as a homosexual player and a historian of homosexuality, I do feel compelled to highlight the fact that animosity toward homosexuality (if not outright intolerance) is very much so a cross-cultural phenomenon. It's not universal, perhaps, but there's a lot of evidence that even in cultures where it is believed homosexuality was historically 'accepted', it was typically a heavily regulated, slandered, and distrusted practice. I.e., even Greek pederasty was criticized contemporaneously for its sexual elements; the Romans emphasized the power dynamics of homosexual sex; and I could go on, ad nauseam.
There's actually some interesting scholarship concerning homosexuality and its treatment globally (historically) that suggests that societies tended to adopt one of a few ways of handling the big problem of homosexuality, which was mostly the male power dynamic, by either
- 1.) forcing gender queerness on the relationship (1 man is trans/more female)
2.) enforcing age or class asymmetry (the inferior partner is significantly younger or of lower class)
3.) or banning homosexuality outright.
I'm personally in favor of making it an accepted (i.e., no burnings) but perhaps distrusted and derided practice (closer to the opinions of antiquity, i.e. Greeks and Romans). Note, what follows is purely personal opinion, but:
Again, as a player who personally identifies as homosexual, oppression and prejudice have been part and parcel of my life in many ways. In some ways, I appreciate being able to explore what that means in a (safe) fantasy setting. Making homosexuality != outright burning provides enough cultural space to explore those narratives (of oppression, and of resistance and agency) without removing the dynamic of taboo entirely, which is something that I think really is integral to the queer experience (it's a part of the language we use to define ourselves, like the word 'queer' itself).
Obviously, different people will have different thoughts, but hopefully you guys will be comfortable considering my point both on historical and personal/philosophical grounds.
I have to admit, I think Mattc's post was compelling. I have no basis to stand on it, other than choosing how I think I might feel in those shoes. That being said, I wonder how much of his statement is very personal rather than representative of homosexual players' feelings on the subject at large.
Frankly, I'm fine with homosexuality is not generally considered burnable, and maybe even some caveats around discrimination, etc, but I have to admit, it feels wrong to me to encode discrimination that a person 'must' ICly face anymore than I would care to encode that irl for my children to face in their lives. I think this ultimately will require a player poll because I have a suspicion this question will be uncomfortable for many players.
Frankly, I'm fine with homosexuality is not generally considered burnable, and maybe even some caveats around discrimination, etc, but I have to admit, it feels wrong to me to encode discrimination that a person 'must' ICly face anymore than I would care to encode that irl for my children to face in their lives. I think this ultimately will require a player poll because I have a suspicion this question will be uncomfortable for many players.
-
- Information
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 119 guests